DLMSOFebruary 28, 2006 

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT:  Minutes of the Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Finance 

                    Process Review Committee (PRC) Meeting, January 24 and 25, 2006

**PURPOSE:**The DLMS Finance PRC convened in the Andrew T. McNamara Building, Room 3801, Headquarters (HQ) Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), Fort Belvoir, VA, on January 24 and 25, 2006.  The PRC met to discuss Department of Defense (DoD) 4000.25-7-M, Military Standard Billing System (MILSBILLS), issues raised by PRC members, and other financial matters.  These minutes provide a record of the meeting, the issues discussed, and any other associated actions.  The next scheduled meeting is planned for May 2006; specific dates will be announced on the PRC Web site when the meeting arrangements are finalized.  The minutes of the January 2006 meeting will be posted on the Finance PRC Web page, at the following Web address:  

http://www.dla.mil/j-6/dlmso/Programs/Committees/Finance/financeprc.asp.

**DISCUSSION SUMMARY:**

a. **Welcome.**The meeting was convened by the Finance PRC Chair,  Ms. Maria P. Velez.  Ms. Velez welcomed the members in attendance and thanked them for their participation.  The agenda was presented and reviewed, and introductions were made by the members in attendance.  A list of attendees at the Finance PRC meeting is provided. (See enclosure 1.)  Our new director, Mr. Donald C. Pipp, was introduced to committee members.  Mr. Pipp welcomed the committee members and issued a brief statement.

b. **Reduction of Timeframes for Interfund Transfers Remaining in Suspense.**The issue refers to the committee members’ concern in regard to the importance of updating our MILSBILLS manual.  MILSBILLS Interim Change 02-2, Further Reduction of Timeframes for Interfund Transfers Remaining in Suspense, along with the guidance regarding funding for interfund  bills, is not included in DoD 4000.25-7.M.  These regulations are important because they serve to expedite the process by reducing the timeframes from 180 days  to 120 days.  The committee members brought to the attention of the PRC Chair that approved changes are absent from DoD 4000.25-7-M, and that the manual is in dire need to be updated.  PRC members are encouraged to identify other changes or concerns with DoD 4000.25.-7.M, in order to provide current guidance to the community.

c. **Intragovernmental Transaction (IGT) Overview.**  This brief was presented by Mr. Herbert Kaskoff, Business Transformation Agency (BTA).  Mr. Kaskoff briefed the current progress of reimbursables, and mentioned the need to meet with the Finance community, in order to plan the interfund phase of this initiative.  The committee members expressed a high interest in participating on the IGT discussions.  PRC members are encouraged to forward their comments to Mr. Kaskoff .  Mr. Kaskoff will keep the committee informed and will let us know if and when he would have a meeting for all PRC members to attend.  

d. **DoD 4000.25-6-M, DoD Activity Address Code Directory (DoDAAD) Reengineering.**  This brief was presented by Mr. Jack  Carter, DLMSO, Chair, DoDAAD PRC.  Mr. Carter briefed committee members on various issues, to include Country Codes, Authorization Codes, TAC 2 (Ship To) and TAC4, (Type of Address Code.) Mr. Carter explained that TAC 4 was created primarily to be used  in the OCONUS environment.  TAC 4 is a commercial shipping address providing more detailed delivery address for commercial carriers.  In reality TAC4 (Type of Address Code) is supplemental to TAC2 (Ship To).  Mr. Carter also talked of the importance of recognizing that the DoD Activity Address Code (DoDDAC) is used primarily to identify an activity that has requisitioning authority. 

e. **HM DoDAAC**.  Ms. Susan Scott, DFAS-Denver (DFAS-DE), expressed concern about the use of HM DoDAACs.  Ms. Scott mentioned the need of a change, so that all sellers will distribute and account for HM DoDAACs, based on the buyer’s Central Accounts Office (CAO), rather than the old logic that all HM DoDDACs belong to DFAS-Indiana (DFAS-IN).  The idea was discussed and later abandoned, due to the fact that the amount of work related to this issue is not large and it is mainly between DFAS-IN and DFAS-DE.  The committee members representing DFAS-IN and DFAS-DE decided they will work out a solution among themselves.  

f. **DoDDAC  FG4302.**Ms. Scott, DFAS-DE, discussed the exclusion of DoDAAC FG4302, from Approved DLMSO Change, ADC 110-B, Additional Requisition and Interfund Bill Restrictions.   Ms. Scott explained that DoDAAC FG4302 is a DoDAAC assigned to the Pentagon.  DFAS-DE processes their bills.  DoDAAC FG4302 was part of the original request for ADC 110-B, and approved; however, it has been omitted from the published version, due to concerns with the operations being classified.  The committee determined that the commodities purchased are office supplies for the non-classified portion of their operation.  Therefore, this DoDAAC may be included as ADC 110-C.  However, after contacting the CAO, it was determined that a change was not required and a compromise was possible between  Ms. Scott, DFAS DE, and Mr. Mark Minch, Defense Automatic Addressing System Center (DAASC).

g. **General Services Administration (GSA) Billing Procedures.**  The committee addressed a letter from Ms. Linda Rutledge, Chief, Production Branch, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), Arnold, MO.  In the letter, Ms. Rutledge expressed concern about the way GSA is handling the billing process for the Military Interdepartmental Purchase Requests (MIPR).  Ms. Rutledge requests that GSA assign a new column on their bills that lists the MIPR number.  The committee understands Ms. Rutledge’s situation and the effects of applying a payment to the wrong MIPR numbers.  The committee also understands GSA’s inability to abide to this request.  GSA is still using an 80-digit data element format legacy system and can not change their billing method at this time.  The committee will explain this to Ms. Rutledge, and also will request her to follow the guidance in DoD 4000.25-7-M, C1.3.3.1.,   March 2004.  This reference states that the designated office of primary responsibility (OPR) for the DLMS Finance PRC shall:  “**Serve as the focal point for MILSBILLS and fulfill the responsibilities of the Finance PRC.”**The OPR, in this case, is DFAS-DE,  and the Point of Contact is Ms. Susan Scott. Therefore,  Ms. Rutledge’s request should have been forwarded to DFAS-DE.  This item remains to be discussed after Ms. Scott, DFAS DE, and  Ms. Rutledge, NGA, follow the proper MILSBILLS procedures.

h. **Standard Financial Information Structure (SFIS) Presentations.**Three presentations on SFIS were provided by members of the Business Transformation Agency, (BTA) led by Mr. Ray Bombac,  Ms. Kimberly Pisall and   Ms. Patricia Phillips.  All committee members and guests were very interested in these presentations and agreed that the information provided is critical.  However, the Finance PRC Committee expressed to the BTA representatives concern that BTA did not involve the interfund process in their flowchart presentations.  The committee would like to have participation in the development of the interfund flowcharts.  The committee would also like to be able to meet with BTA’s representatives and discuss BTA’s interpretation of the interfund process.  The committee is grateful to BTA for their time and otherwise thorough presentations.

i. **Discussion on Interfund Monthly Bills.**This discussion involved the concern of some committee members about agencies not following the use of alpha characters to identify monthly bills, as stated in DoD 4000.25-7-M, C2.2.6.6., Table C2.T2, Standard Interfund Bill Numbers.  The committee decided that a closer look was necessary regarding this matter.  Some members expressed their understanding that, in the early 1990s, there was an exception to this recommendation.   Other members expressed the need for this issue to be researched back to the 1990s, in order to decide whether this recommendation should be eliminated from the MILSBILLS manual or updated to identify exceptions. 

j. **Discussion on Catalog Price Changes.**This discussion was based on an example provided by Mr. Wayne Loman, DFAS-Kansas City (DFAS-KC).  The example given was a purchase order that was placed via FedLog and WebFLIS, for a specific dollar amount.   On the following morning, the unit price had increased.  The committee discussed price changes; and agreed that there can be a standard price change between the date of the requisition and the date of the shipment. However, the price at the date of shipment is the valid price.  In this particular case the committee agreed that the price changed occurred after the shipment date; therefore, the price change was not valid. The committee recommended Ms. Susan  Newton, DFAS KC, to initiate a price challenge action.  We are providing you with a list of Price Challenge Points of Contact.  This list was provided to us by Ms. Catherine Schaffer, DFAS Columbus.  (See enclosure 2.)

k. **DLMS Flowcharts Update.**Mr. Nat Obey, DLMSO, presented the new flowcharts for 810L (Invoice).  These flowcharts have been developed and will be utilized in the DLMS training at DFAS-DE, on  February 23 and 24, 2006. The committee agreed with the flowcharts and recommended minor changes.

l. **Farewell to Maxine Gross.** DLMSO provided Ms. Gross with a plaque in recognition for her outstanding contributions to the PRC Committee, from 1996-2005.  We wish Maxine a very happy retirement!

m. **Action Items.**

1. Ms. Velez, DLMSO, will research for interim and approved changes, dating from 1998 through 2005, and will update                  DoD 4000.25-7-M, with current regulations and procedures.

2. Ms. Scott, DFAS-DE, and Mr. Minch, DAASC, will work out internal procedures to process transactions containing HM DoDAACS.

3. Ms. Scott, DFAS-DE, and Mr. Minch, DAASC, will work out internal procedures to correct transaction flow of DoDAAC FG4302. 

4. Ms. Scott, DFAS-DE, will contact Ms. Rutledge, NGA, and will explain the current situation with GSA billing procedures.                Ms. Scott will inform us of the results of the conversation and if there is a need for additional action.

5. Ms. Susan Newton, DFAS-KC, will resolve the issue dealing with price challenges and will keep us informed of the results.

6. All PRC members are encouraged to submit their ideas and concerns relating to the intragovernmental transactions to the POC for BTA.

7. Our next PRC conference is tentatively scheduled for                   May 23-25, 2006.